Share This Page

Defense a partner in environmental rescues

| Saturday, Aug. 10, 2013, 5:36 p.m.
Melissa Booker, a civilian wildlife biologist working for the Navy on San Clemente Island, holds two San Clemente Island lizards saved from extinction through environmental efforts on San Clemente Island, Wednesday, July 17, 2013. In the decade since the Navy left the Puerto Rican island of Vieques, bombardments and live-fire trainings have grown exponentially on this windswept California island , which has special federal status because of its biological diversity. Since then, endangered species like the island fox, night lizard and loggerhead shrike have grown in number too, thriving alongside the blasts after nearing extinction. It's a phenomenon happening at military installations across the nation where endangered species are flourishing despite the drills. (AP Photo/Lenny Ignelzi)

SAN CLEMENTE ISLAND, Calif. — The sign leaves no doubt about the risk in entering the steep seaside hills that North America's rarest bird calls home: “Danger. Boom. Explosives. Unexploded Ordnance and Laser Range in Use. Keep Out.”

Despite the weekly explosions that rock this Navy-owned island off the Southern California coast, the San Clemente Island loggerhead shrike has been rebounding from the brink of extinction, even on the military's only ship-to-shore bombardment range.

The black, gray and white songbird is among scores of endangered species thriving on military lands during the past decade.

For many, it's a surprising contrast, with troops preparing for war, yet taking precautions to not disturb animals such as the red-cockaded woodpecker and thumb-size Pacific pocket mouse. But military officials downplay the relationship, saying they're concerned primarily with national security.

Defense spending on threatened and endangered species jumped nearly 45 percent over the past decade from about $50 million a year in 2003 to about $73 million in 2012. The military protects roughly 420 federally listed species on more than 28 million acres, according to the Pentagon.

The Defense Department is increasingly partnering with environmental groups to buy critical habitats that can act as buffer zones around bases, including a deal announced in June near the Army's Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Washington state that will restore prairie habitat.

“I've seen entire convoys with dozens of soldiers come to a screeching halt because a desert tortoise was crossing the road,” Pentagon spokesman Mark Wright said.

Environmentalists say there has been an attitude shift by the Pentagon, which has a history of seeking exemptions from environmental laws in the name of national security.

“They've come a long way and do deserve credit,” said Mark Delaplaine, of the California Coastal Commission, which has battled the Navy over sonar testing that it believes harms marine mammals.

Generals shudder at being considered tree huggers. But the military's top brass realizes protecting wildlife can, in turn, protect training ranges.

The more wildlife thrives, the fewer the restrictions. If endangered species populations decline further, the military could face being told to move training.

“Our conservation efforts are first and foremost focused on protecting readiness and eliminating the need for restrictions on training,” said John Conger, acting deputy undersecretary of defense for installations and environment.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.